State v. Navarro
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
¶ 1. This case presents an issue of first impression in Wisconsin. Jose Carlos Navarro contends that Article 36 of the Vienna Convention bestows a judicially enforceable individual right upon foreign nationals who have been detained by police to consult with the consular officials of their country. He argues that because the police failed to notify him of this right at the time he was arrested, the police violated his right to consular notification and his potentially incriminating post-arrest statements should have been suppressed. We conclude that the Vienna Convention does not create a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edye v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Breard v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- United States v. Chucks EmuegbunamCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. Jose Lombera-CamorlingaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Sorto v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005
- Bell v. TrueDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2006
- State v. Sanchez-LlamasOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- Gomez v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2004
- Sorto, Walter AlexanderCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005